Students now have the right to know their marks and universities are worried that they could be required to justify a degree class in court.

Reluctant to act alone, the vice-chancellors have been anxiously waiting for a signal from the Government.

It was the relentless rise in the proportion of "good degrees" - firsts and upper seconds - that helped persuade Margaret Hodge, the minister for higher education, that classification no longer served any purpose.

Related Articles

Mrs Hodge is understood to favour the American system of giving graduates a single average score from 4 to 3.9, 3.8, 3.7 all the way down to 1 - the score reflects the average marks awarded for the modules that make up a degree - which allows for much finer grading.

The score could be accompanied by a progress file, or record of achievement, describing exactly what the student studied.

The prospect of change was welcomed by Peter Williams, the chief executive of the Quality Assurance Agency, which is responsible for defining the difference between each class of degree.

"Degree classifications provide very little information about a student's achievements and they give a pretence of accuracy," Mr Williams said. "They are such a blunt instrument."

Last year nearly nine per cent of graduates were awarded a first. Forty-three per cent were awarded an upper second, 33 per cent a lower second and nearly eight per cent a third. Seven per cent of degrees were unclassified.

The highest proportion of firsts - 47.8 per cent - was awarded by Cambridge, and the lowest - 4.2 per cent - by London Guildhall.